I honestly wonder if in the age we are living in, there couldn't be a website or a movement to have boxers' records updated to reflect what the decision should of been. Similar to a newspaper decision of the early 1900s compared to a bunch of No contests/no decisions
Yeah well, I vehemently disagree, as do many others. You were giving him way too much credit, for rounds he did **** all in.
6/10/23 - Jaime Munguía vs. Sergiy Derevyanchenko - Munguia UD Goddamn... they just love robbing Ukrainians don't they?
Also not a robbery - nobody is using that word about this fight so far as I can see. The amalgamation websites have it a point either way. Hard to think of a more obvious "any close card is fine fight" tbh, although I did see it by a point to Sergiy I also scored him the seventh, and it was so, so close. This thread is basically a tally of occasions where your scorecards diverge from the official scorecards, which is fair enough given how many fights you score, but I don't know how "Official" it is. Paints a false image for me.
You called the fight a robbery: To be honest though, neither decision can even be called dodgy for my money. It does raise the point, worth maybe identifying whether you are denoting it a robbery or a dodgy decision when you list them - or even put it on a sliding scale, 5 being Whitaker-Chavez, 1 being Sergiy-Munguia (as I see it).
Most on here thought Derevyanchenko should've won even with the knockdown, including myself and that's a opinion I've seen shared by many across the web. So to say it was a robbery is far from some egregious stretch. Most of Derevyanchenko's losses have been one round difference type affairs, that many have been bitching about for years, this is another one of those type matches. So go scold all of the people who thought GGG, Adames, Jacobs and even Charlo got gifts too, and there's plenty of them. So I disagree with you once again.
It is an egregious stretch. Claiming a fight that most people had extremely close is a robbery - that is, that a crime was perpetrated against the loser - is not fair, especially to the winner. I saw round seven as a round that should be scored even under most sensible scoring systems but I had to score it one way or the other and preferred Sergiy but if I had seen one punch differently in that round i'd have had it by the same score to Derevyanchenko. For all that you've seen many across the web scoring it one way, there are also many scoring it the other. The most important thing that needs to be recognised with these fights is that they can look different ringside. It's horrible the way people watching on tv - sometimes even on their phones - will start screaming robbery when the fights can look so very different ringside. I've seen fights with huge swings from ringside versus television, it is crazy. I think, you'd have to admit, that you've done more of the scolding where this decision is concerned over the last 24hrs that I have. Either way, hopefully, contrary opinions can be made welcome. My point is just that a) you don't seem to look into ringside reporting where these supposed robberies are concerned and that's a shame and b) two fights you've listed this weekend are generating 0 heat in the industry itself. Nobody is describing these fights as a robberies anywhere but our RBR and Twitter. The reason for this is that the fight was very close and any close card is fine. Munguia got two of them, so he won. That's just the sport. 114-113, either way, is the optimum, I like a card for Sergiy best based upon what I saw on TV but by the narrowest of possible margins, literally a punch.
It's a debatable decision, I doubt any reasonable person would disagree with that, so therefore it goes on this thread, like every other sketchy or dodgy decision. That's all I have to say on the matter, and I'm not going to be drawn into this utterly pointless ouroboros like hair splitting discussion.
